Public employment. Post-termination judicial remedy, alone, is not sufficient due process.

Hallsmith v. City of Montpelier, 2015 VT 83 (19-Jun-2015)

ROBINSON, J. This appeal calls upon us to determine whether a post-termination judicial remedy, in the form of a breach-of-contract action or a Vermont Rule of Civil Procedure 75 petition, is sufficient to satisfy the due-process rights of an employee whose employment is protected by a “for cause” requirement and who is terminated by a municipal employer following pre-termination proceedings that do not by themselves satisfy due process. Appellee petitioned for Rule 75 relief, arguing that the City of Montpelier failed to provide her sufficient due-process protections in terminating her employment. The trial court agreed and ordered the City to provide a new post-termination grievance hearing that fully satisfies her due-process rights. the City urges us to hold that recourse to the courts alone provides sufficient post-termination due-process protections in a case like this. We affirm.

We conclude that the availability of post-termination judicial remedies, as opposed to an administrative remedy, does not satisfy due process in a case in which a full administrative hearing does not occur pre-termination. We reach this conclusion for several reasons. First, post-termination judicial review would effectively shift the burden of proof from the City to the terminated employee. Second, post-termination judicial review often provides less timely relief than administrative proceedings. Post-termination judicial review would also risk transforming “our [trial] courts [into] hearing officers for municipalities.” In the context of a tenured municipal employee protected by a “justifiable cause” provision, We hold post-termination administrative proceedings are required to satisfy due process where pre-termination proceedings do not include a full hearing but instead meet only the minimum pre-termination requirements of Loudermill. In the absence of post-termination administrative proceedings, neither a Rule 75 appeal nor a breach-of-contract action filed in the trial court provide sufficient post-termination process to satisfy the Due Process Clause.